If you’d like an example of why President Obama drives conservatives crazy, he gave us a perfect one over the weekend while speaking with CNN’s Fareed Zakaria. When Zakaria asked President Obama if it was possible to work with Iran’s hardline Ayatollah Khamenei, the President responded by shrugging off the threat of the Islamic extremists.
Obama dismissively called Khamenei a simple “politician” who at the end of the day would make the decision that would be most politically profitable. What President Obama seems to either misunderstand or simply ignore is the reality that Ayatollah Khamenei isn’t just the political leader of Iran… he’s also the RELIGIOUS leader. Khamenei is a “true believer” when it comes to hardline Islam and the importance of violent jihad. This is why Iran is the world’s leading supporter of Islamic terrorism, funding terrorists across the Middle East, Africa and around the world.
Obama is making a tremendously naïve and utterly foolish decision by moving forward in “good faith” with the corrupt and evil Iranian regime.
Well, as I said, Fareed, you don’t negotiate deals with your friends. You negotiate them with your enemies. And superpowers don’t respond to taunts. Superpowers focus on what is it that we need to do in order to preserve our national security and the national security of our allies and our friends…
So there’s always a gap between rhetoric and action. And, you know, the Supreme Leader is a politician, apparently, just like everybody else. What I’m focused on is can we make sure that they are doing what they have to do and that we have sufficient safeguards and verification mechanisms to ensure that they don’t have a nuclear weapon.
And, again, Fareed, it is very important, I think, over the next several weeks, to not get distracted by tone, vote counts, is Mitch McConnell’s feelings hurt. But let’s address the argument. And it — the central point I was making yesterday — fairly exhaustively, it was a long speech — was that nobody has presented a plausible alternative, other than military strikes, to prevent Iran from getting a nuclear weapon.
Nobody has presented a more effective way to ensure they don’t have a nuclear weapon, including military strikes, because we know, actually, if this deal is executed, it will provide more limitations on the Iranian nuclear program for a longer period of time in a more verifiable way. And that central argument hasn’t really been effectively contested. Nobody has had a good answer for that.